For those of you that are so willing to give away profit sharing, maybe a history lesson is in order. We did not receive PS out of the goodness of managements hearts. We received it due to the enormous paycuts and termination of our defined benefit plan. This is from our Delta pilot contract history put out by the union under the LOA 51 title.

Required Delta to reach agreement on terms and conditions if DB plan was terminated and to discuss profit sharing and equity during comprehensive negotiations that would recognize pre-bankruptcy concessions from LOA #46.

We took a 32.5% paycut in letter 46 that was suppose to insulate us from the company coming for more in BK. Anyone remember something called a bankruptcy protection letter? The union kind of omits that little nugget in the description of LOA 46 since the company turned around and originally wanted another 19% paycut but settled for a 14% paycut while we were in bankruptcy.

Long story short we paid for this PS. It wasn't given to us. It was earned. So why don't we just pretend like it doesn't exist and negotiate our payrates according to the profits that Delta is currently making.

IF, after the fact, the company wants to talk about turning PS into additional pay raises separate to section 6 then it will cost them a premium not a 1:1 like we did in C2012. I'm tired of taking money out of one of my pockets and putting it into the other and calling it a raise.

I would like to have Out of Base Swap with the Swap Board so pilots that need to drop a trip have a better chance of doing so when reserve coverage is low.

I also want Out of Base White Slip to have a priority over in base reserve like the pre bankruptcy contract did so pilots that want to increase their productivity can do so voluntarily.

But you've got the right guy anyway. I make no secret of it, though that's the way the games played here.

I still have not seen a single reference from the company expressing any desire to reduce profit sharing. That may change depending on the contract vote at American. If the contact is voted down their payrates going forward will in part be based on our rates. The company may want some of the profit sharing in the pay rates to drive up Americans costs. If the contract is voted down I don't see the company making a serious push to get rid of profit sharing. Why tie themselves to higher pay rates when the inevitable downturn hits.

Exactly correct.

Carl

Trolling, changing names and avatars is not how the game is played here. Your credibility is completely shot here now, and it's entirely self-inflicted. Might want to take a break for a while.

Carl

Is it possible that by defining profit sharing "at risk compensation" and not part of our expected regular pay we have a better chance of negotiating better rates?

Would we aid our negotiations for higher rates if we removed the profit sharing component of out compensation from our pay negotiations?

How does the NLRB view profit sharing vis-à-vis pay-rates?

Cheers
George

I expect a 4/6.5/3/3 raise like last contract if profit sharing is left alone. With profit sharing, I'm finally making more than my friends at Southwest hired about the same time. I expect our retirement contributions to be brought up to 16 percent to match the other big 2. I expect our JV scope to be renegotiated to put the company into compliance (unfortunate, but probably true), and I expect the unverified sick leave to drop to 75 hours per year if not 50. We'll see what actually happens, but this is what I am expecting based on our history and the rumors I'm hearing. I also expect split duty periods.

Prior to seeing TA2012, how many references from the company did you see expressing cutting our profit sharing and increasing 76 seat RJ's by 70?

Carl

I don't see the incentive for them to do that, at least not until the IAM F/A vote is settled.

Section 6 completion, separate LOA concurrent with or immediately following TA ratification.